Originally Posted by Freeman15

Dear God I hate how liberal academia has destroyed pragmatic thought in my generation. As a political science major who put up with 3 years (gotta love testing for credit) of this crap, I feel inclined to share with you all a little bit of insight concerning the "social-construct" of race.

Let's deal with this bit of position you have posted...I deleted the rest of the nonsense you posted for space constraints.

pragmatism

Main Entry:
prag·ma·tism Listen to the pronunciation of pragmatism
Pronunciation:
\ˈprag-mə-ˌti-zəm\
Function:
noun
Date:
circa 1864

1 : a practical approach to problems and affairs <tried to strike a balance between principles and pragmatism> 2 : an American movement in philosophy founded by C. S. Peirce and William James and marked by the doctrines that the meaning of conceptions is to be sought in their practical bearings, that the function of thought is to guide action, and that truth is preeminently to be tested by the practical consequences of belief .

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=003...3E2.0.CO%3B2-G
" Pragmatism, we are told is a temper of mind, an attitude, and so far as it is this, it cannot be changed by argumentation. It is generally recognized that philosophic attitudes and religious beliefs are ultimately a matter of constitutional, vital reaction, that as the Sphinx looks out on the sand because she was cut out for that purpose, so we face the world in certain characteristic ways, because "it is our nature to."

How utterly ridiculous!

According to Dr. Ron Smothermon, in his best-selling book, "Winning through Enlightenment", in the chapter on "belief systems", he writes, " If what you believe is actually true, you don't need to believe it.
A belief system is a collection of sayings about a person, place, or thing which is designed to define that person, place or thing so that it can be dealt with.
Beliefs arise from your unwillingness to trust direct experience. Beliefs then structure your experience of the world so that similarities (like "race", "culture", or "mindset") are emphasized and unique differences are not noticed. In fact, whatever comes by for direct experience that contradicts a belief system tends to be ignored or explained away as something unusual:
"the exception that proves the rule".It just so happens that belief systems create a false context called: "It can't be _______." It can't be done. My mother could never change. It can't be that my boss could ever be rational.
Belief systems then limit what we are willing to experience in life and what we are willing to have happen in life. "Miracles" definitely do not happen within the false context of a belief system. Slavery was not ended within a belief system. It could only be ended from outside that belief system. Belief systems restrict and immobilize the way things are. Meaningful change happens despite belief systems, not because of them.
Now, I want you to know more about where beliefs come from. In the beginning of your life you had none. Neither did you have prejudice (hello!), opinion, position, nor judgment. Then someone you loved bribed and threatened you and made you a deal you almost couldn't refuse. The deal was to sell out the joy of your direct experience of life and adopt a belief about something. Beliefs are created in an atmosphere of fear. You feared the consequences if you didn't believe it. You would get sent to your room, denied supper, kept from the movies, spanked, sent to hell, not loved, and so forth, if you didn't believe it. The Boogie Man would get you, and back then, unlike now, that was serious. You didn't have to sell out, but you did. "They" only threatened you; you sold out.
I want you to know what you gave up when you sold out. You gave up your naturalness. You gave up your natural knowingness about life and became lost. You gave up your genius. Yes, you are a natural genius, except that your fear of going out of agreement with the world keeps you stuck in your beliefs, and prevents you from expressing that natural genius. And you did it. No one did it to you. And you can reclaim it; no one can reclaim it for you.
You can't read enough books, go to enough classes, get degrees(hello!), to reclaim it. None of that will reclaim it. Only you can. To do it you start with a willingness to consider the possibility that your beliefs are just beliefs and do not reflect "truth". You begin by remembering what you always knew: the truth stands alone without need for propping up by your beliefs. The truth is not what you believe but what you experience directly."

On Racism:
"Mankind has played a cruel joke on itself by exercising the ability to adapt skin color to climatic conditions. There are certain areas of the world where the intensity of sun exposure renders survival difficult for white-skinned people. Man, the consummate survivor, naturally figured a way around being fried by the sun. Merely disperse the melanin pigment of the skin evenly, and develop a bit more of it, and presto! Automatic protection from the sun.
Nature did this much. The mind of man did the rest. Of course skin color isn't the only physical characteristic humanity uses to divide itself, but it serves admirably to demonstrate a principle. Biologically speaking, there is no "race", except at track meets. Race is a false concept invented by the mind of man for the purpose of dominating and manipulating others. The specific location of "race" within the mind is in that part known as "belief systems" (Nicely dovetailed, don't you think?)
A belief exists that there is a natural division of people. Resting on this belief is a system of justification making it OK to segregate some from others. Further justification makes it OK to think of the other race as "naturally inferior" or naturally "red-necked", or whatever. Both of these are positions or points of view. So the structure goes like this: the foundation stone is a belief called "Race is a natural condition" (which you so eloquently explained in your previous post, "erroneously"...it, in fact, is not a natural condition, as Dr. Smothermon insists). This belief supports the justification "There is a natural division of humankind" (pragmatic). This gives rise to the point of view called "They are naturally the way they are". This point of view then makes it possible to prepare people for mistreatment by segregation. At that point, the whole thing surfaces, and mistreatment is called "mistreatment". The important thing to realize here is that mistreatment could not occur without its supporting structure.
Underlying even a belief such as "race is a natural condition" is the ground of being that we are the contents of our minds ( of which it's only 2 purposes is "survival" and being right at the expense of making others wrong), that there is no way we can ever be more than the sum of our parts. This is the base lie that endarkens the world. You know you can give up being a racist and you will still be who you are. Your life will be naturally valuable. You will survive. The world will not end. And you can still contribute to it.
After you become responsible for 'your beliefs' about "race", what will be up for you is the world condition. The way you can transform the world in this regard is to get up off of your racism. This gives others the opportunity to get up off of their racism. Treat people as who they are, not who you believe they are. I promise you that they will be transformed in your experience and often in their experience as well.
Finally, I want you to know the ultimate truth about "race":
THERE IS NO SUCH THING."

Originally Posted by Incognito

As per request I have reposted this comment.

I guess to further discussion I would ask if you agree with this analysis or if you can think of any other type of people with regards to race relations. I suppose that all I will add for now is that I like to consider myself a type 1 person and that of the other two types, the type 3 people get on my nerves more than the type 2's. While the speech the type 2's use is ignorant and disgusting, the type 3 people are just too pathetic for words. Whether it is feeling guilty for no reason for accusing guilt for no reason, these perspectives only distract us from addressing real issues of racism and, as I said before, decrease the value of the word racism.

Originally Posted by aaronssongs

You just proved my point. Academia ignores actual human practice in order to substantiate otherwise indefensible positions.

I do not condone or engage in racism, and other than yourself, no poster here has ever levied such accusations. I do however understand that humanity IS divided along RACIAL lines, and while all people should be treated equally by law, it is IMPOSSIBLE to remove people from their nature, and that is to seek FAMILIARITY, look at ANY prison and tell me the gangs aren't divided by race.

Originally Posted by aaronssongs

Please...if you're promoting Academia as some kind of "go to", as the authority in human relations, or discussion of social constructs...then I already feel contempt for it, when you clearly haven't identified what you mean by "academia"...what I think you mean is, claiming the intellectual "high ground", based on your many degrees and your magna cum laudes from various institutions of learning, which may or may not be factual.

Originally Posted by Freeman15

Actually, if you had comprehended what I wrote, I indicted academia for their impractical and PC stance of claiming race as purely a social construct. You need to READ Aaron, it's fun......damental.

Again, since I don't understand you...and like you even less...you need to be specific in your responses..because you have a penchant for exaggeration and hyperbole.



Six kids beat up one kid to the point of putting him in the hospital. The kid who got his *** kicked had nothing to do with the noose-hanging incident, and ACCORDING TO THE ACCUSED had levied racial epithets. At least two of the accused had histories of violence, and Robert Bailey had been in two other fights with white students THAT WEEK. You seem to condone physical violence as an acceptable recourse to objectionable speech since you condone the actions of the six black students. That means that the christian right now has the right to beat the hell out of openly gay couples. Good call.


Let's be clear...Jena, Louisiana, is a racist town. The DA is a racist...and evidently, the families of the white students are typical racists....not all, but a sizable contingency. The white students "claimed" territory..."a specific tree" on the school yard. A black student "trespassed" on their alleged territory...and they thought they'd send a clear message..."nooses hanging on the the very tree". Racial epithets were being slung by both sides...why didn't the school staff do something about it? Because it was "normal" for them to act that way. It was the status quo...so, instead of nipping it in the bud, things spiraled out of hand..and escalated...
When you call somebody a name...they just might kick your butt.. Solution: if you don't have something nice, pc, or innocuous to say...say nothing at all, otherwise you might get your *** kicked...there are consequences (and benefits) to every action.
But you saw no reason to call the white students into responsibility..you only saw the wreckage of the aftermath of irresponsible behavior...and were all to willing to hold the black students accountable, while absolving the white students of any blame or responsibility...somehow, I see that as racist.
And it goes along with your previous postings here, and on Conflicting Views.
Point.

Oh, and PLEASE use your "log" to demonstrate my alleged racism. I do enjoy disecting your petty claims.


The word you were going for, despite all of your degrees and bandying about of your certificates is "dissecting"....still can't spell, can you?


Provide evidence.
Make me. Oh, don't think I won't when the time is ripe.



Actually, you were banned for flaming myself and other members after COUNTLESS warnings and temporary bans. You just don't know how to have civil discourse with those with whom you disagree, and that's why you were banned.

And you're a bald-faced liar. . I have civil discourse with those that bring it...I don't have to play nice with avowed "racists". You went running to the moderators that I was calling you what you weren't. Except that you are that. So what? You want to come for me? I can provide address and directions.



Given a stressful situation humans WILL flock to security, and there is security in familiarity. ANY shrink will tell you that.



You clearly haven't ever toured a prison, or read a book on prison gangs, or watched the countless specials on MSNBC or Nat'l Geographic. Hell, the Mexican inmates in California go so far as to divide their own race in two (northerners and southerners). In prison, gangs are divided by race, this is a FACT. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it any less true. Grow up man.

Originally Posted by xjoe3x

Name calling is not a reason for violence. If someone calls me a cracker I do not go and beat them to death. At best it is a mitigating circumstance, but not an excuse.

He did not say anything that would even imply "that the only good black is one that is locked up". Prisons are greatly segregated by race. He has not said anything that is racist.